“We have examined the scriptures thoroughly, and I can conclusively say that there’s nothing to indicate that RFID Chips are Satanic in anyway. If anything, these devices are a blessing from God himself, bestowed upon humanity to solve many of the world’s ills.”

Satire, with a target such as Bergoglio in one's sights, is impossible.

As Hutton Gibson pointed out to my father-in-law back in the 'seventies, it had become impossible to make a real joke, because he'd think of something outrageous that nobody could believe, then find out that it had already actually been done by some idiot or other in all seriousness!

Yes don't worry it happens to the best of us, you have been officially trolled. Good thing is you came to verify the news, there are some people that never fact check and this is why there should always be a disclaimer to any prankster joke. It reminds me of the radio show in the 50's where it was doing the fictional story of War of the Worlds (some sort of apocalyptic Alien take over thingy). Some people tuned in late, and thought it was the end of the world, because of the noise it was making was so real for some of these folks. Some of them took their own lives jumped out some windows etc...

I got this from Novus Ordo watch twitter feed, sometimes they are a bit sensational (too much for my taste). Sometimes they get it spot on, this is what I fear the most. I told this to some seminarian friends of mine (currently in FSSP), that once they hear a story in the year 2014 (some news story of a new Council it should be a deal breaker sedevacante eye opener). Even Bergoglio has surprised me, because I wasn't even expecting an ecumenical "Council" with the schismatic Orthodox, i.e. something particular with them but it makes perfect sense if you come to think of it. It has to be done in baby steps, since it has never been done before he has to first do it, with those "who are closest in partial communion." I was actually thinking more of a pan-ecumenical Council of world religions, but I think he will do something like that at some point. They won't of course call it an Ecumenical Council, like this one Nicea III. Its essential to the new religion, this is eerily getting close with prophecy. It reminds me of Vatican II self-referencing itself all the time . So here is how it goes, you set up a novelty, that becomes tradition and you set a trend. To them every single action is progressive in nature, and its important to take note of the baby steps to insure to understand the whole picture of the apostasy in its totality. Take for example Ratzinger's Assisi III meeting, where he included something novel, such as including even atheists in the discussion. His immediate predecessor now starts doing correspondence with atheists etc... Ratzinger spoke of a moral way of doing contraceptives, Bergoglio will take the baton and continue the run where he left off. This is their MO since anti J XXIII, the same happened with anti JP II. He would constantly try to out-do anti Paul VI. Now Bergoglio has set the bar pretty high, I wonder since he has put that date so far off, if he will plan to retire also. He also already stated that it has become a tradition to retire now. I think he has done with the explicit intent of leaving this to his successor, I seriously don't think he will make it to 2025. With his age, and how rapidly crazy he does things and changes his mind so much. He might just be testing the waters to see how some novus Ordites take it.

The way I see this new Nicea III is very much like the canonization of Wojtyla and Roncalli. I remember hearing stories that this was going to happen and I would tell people to their face that it WOULD NEVER happen. It was "impossible" I was so sure of myself (when I realized how wrong I was it was really quite humbling, we should never make assumptions of what God will or will not permit this is very much what many sedeplenist do with respect to SV'ism they put God's mercy in a box of their own making.), and very likely you are going to hear people say the same thing about this. Since its so far off in the future most will put it as something that "I will see it when it takes place." They don't understand that the main reason for the date being so far off is to condition you with each progressive novelty, to accept this as a true part of "living tradition." The other day I heard from a friend who is right now in Latin America. Some of the priest's of IBP (Institute of the Good Shepherd) are super Lefebvrian now, they are starting to really regret having gone back with the Conciliar Church.

Only as primes inter pares, and this is why they are so extatic about him. Many of them are very worried about him going a bit too far on Ecumenism, and all the other moral positions he has taken. Even the Orthodox still venerate a Bishop as the highest place in the Church, but Bergoglio lowers that to no more than an advisory role at best for the laity. He wants a bottom up institution... This is of course crazy, because we are talking about a Divine institution, and not HUMAN institutions (which do operate better on a bottom up decentralized fashion).

I have been reading about Roncalli and the genesis of the Council. What is very striking is the similarity of character between Roncalli and Bergoglio. Both humble-humble types, ostentatiously so, both men of actions rather than words, both sly and calculating, both given to big moments designed to create headlines, both amiable in nature and particularly friendly to non-Catholics, both Modernists. Bergoglio is John XXIV.

“They disguise themselves, they disguise themselves as good people: they make themselves up like little holy cards, looking up at heaven as they pray, making sure they are seen—they believe they are more righteous than others, they despise others!"

‘Mah,’ they say, “I’m very Catholic, because my uncle was a great benefactor, my family is this, I’m that… I’ve learned... I know this bishop, this Cardinal, this priest... I am this or that...’ They think they are better than others. This is hypocrisy!"

"Sloth-diseased, acedic Christians!"

“I think of many Christians, of many Catholics: yes, they are Catholics, but without enthusiasm, even embittered!"

"They are people without light – real downers!"

"And how many Christians are like this?” he asked, “selfish, out for themselves.”

“Christians who do not leave space for the grace of God – and the Christian life, the life of these people, consists in having all the paperwork, all the certificates, in order!”

"The theologian satisfied that his thought is complete and conclusive is mediocre.”

“The theologian who does not pray and does not adore God ends up drowning in the most disgusting narcissism.”

“This is an ecclesiastical sickness. The narcissism of theologians and thinkers does such harm; it’s disgusting.”

“Your institutions are not machines for producing theologians and philosophers.”

"There are Christian bats who prefer the shadows to the light of the presence of the Lord!”

We have heard of so many good Catholics, good Christians, friends and benefactors of the Church that – it has been revealed - acted for personal profit. They presented themselves as benefactors of the Church and made money on the side…”

And in the Church there are climbers, people driven by ambition! There are many of them! But if you like climbing go to the mountains and climb them: it is healthier! Do not come to Church to climb!

President Shimon Peres will head to the Vatican on Sunday to participate in an interfaith peace prayer event at the invitation of Pope Francis.

Francis issued the invitation to Peres and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas during his visit last week to Jordan, Israel, and the Palestinian Authority.

According to a statement released by Peres’s spokesperson, Abbas, Peres, and Francis will be joined by Jewish, Christian and Islamic religious leaders.

The event will feature readings about peace by the clergy from the Tanach, the New Testament and the Quran. Francis will then read religious verses with Peres and Abbas, which the three will have selected for the ceremony.

Israel’s delegation, which the Chief Rabbinate helped to select, will include members of the local Jewish, Druze and Muslim communities.

Traveling with Peres will be Rabbi Rasson Arussi, of the Chief Rabbinate Council; Israel Prize laureate and Talmud scholar, Daniel Sperber; former chief rabbi of Ireland and interreligious adviser to the Israeli Chief Rabbinate, David Rosen; spiritual Leader of the Druze faith in Israel, Sheikh Moafaq Tarif; and Sheikh Mohammad Kiwan, chairman of the Muslim community of Israel.

Abbas’s delegation is also expected to include Islamic and Christian leaders.

In order to accommodate Jewish religious beliefs, the event will be held in a garden that is not a place of prayer, nor will it hold any religious symbols.

The Vatican will broadcast a live feed of the event to viewers across the world.

Peres will also meet with Italian political leaders, including President Giorgio Napolitano and Minister of Foreign Affairs Federica Mogherini.

Think about that. Because the Jews don't believe in religious images, the event will be held in a place without any. So this is ecumenism which violates divine law as infallibly proposed by the Catholic Church, but which is careful to avoid breaching the false law of a false religion.

And why? Because the Jews believe in their religion, whereas Francis doesn't believe in the one he purports to represent.

_________________In Christ our King.

Sat Jun 07, 2014 7:23 am

Recusant

Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 12:28 pmPosts: 282

Re: Bergoglio information

The layman Bergoglio receives a "blessing" from the Anglican layman Welby.

For all those neo-cons in the Novus Ordo Church who were still in denial over Francis’ repeated affirmations that he opposes converting non-Catholics to Catholicism, “Pope” Jorge Bergoglio reiterated his position once more, this time in a conversation he had with Evangelical Protestant Brian Stiller, who is the Global Ambassador of the World Evangelical Alliance.

Stiller visited Francis in the Vatican in June 2014 and published a blog post about his encounter, entitled “Lunch with the Pope”, on July 9. There are two salient passages in Stiller’s account worth quoting:

We talked about Christians marginalized, pressed under the weight of government power or the majority presence of other faiths. He listened and then told a remarkable story. In his years in and out of Rome, he became friends with the pastor of a Pentecostal Church in Rome. In time he came to learn that the church and pastor felt the power and presence of the Catholic Church, with its weighty presence, obstructing their desire to grow and be a witness. “So,” he said, “this July I will preach in his church on a Sunday and offer an apology from my church for the hurt it has brought to their congregation.”

…

It’s fair to ask what kind of Catholic Church we as Evangelicals want to see. At lunch I asked Pope Francis what his heart was for evangelism. He smiled, knowing what was behind my question. His comment was, “I’m not interested in converting Evangelicals to Catholicism. I want people to find Jesus in their own community. There are so many doctrines we will never agree on. Let’s not spend our time on those. Rather, let’s be about showing the love of Jesus.” (Of course Evangelicals do evangelize Catholics and Catholics do the same to us. However, that discussion we will raise another day.)

On July 13, 2014, following the last-minute cancellation of his visit to Gemelli Hospital in Rome that had been scheduled for June 27, Pope Francis sent a video message apologizing to the patients and staff of that institution. The Supreme Pontiff mentions a bad headache and nausea that came over him a few minutes before his departure for Gemelli Hospital, on the afternoon of June 27. The cancellation had been communicated at the very hour of his expected arrival, when his collaborators and all the participants in the Mass that he was supposed to celebrate were already on site. This new cancellation of a public appointment of the Pope had raised numerous questions about the state of his health; some observers even doubt the real reasons for his absence. Previously a visit to the Shrine of Divine Love near Rome, planned for May 18, had to be canceled, in order to lighten the Pope’s schedule before his journey to the Holy Land. The cost of these receptions that were not honored by the presence of the Pope made more than one observer wince: between 140 and 150,000 Euros for the one at Gemelli Hospital; almost 200,000 Euros for the one at the Shrine of Divine Love. Perhaps this very specific fact is what prompted the Pope to apologize to the patients and staff at Gemelli?

On June 16, the American Catholic website Newsmax wondered about the state of the Supreme Pontiff’s health; (the remarks were excerpted by Dr. Jean-Pierre Dickès in a French-language report for Médias-Presse-Info dated June 19): “Apparently the Pope has increasing difficulty breathing, since he has only one lung. Now, because of his new duties, he can no longer exercise; hence he has gained as much as twenty pounds, thus aggravating his respiratory problems. Dr. Peter Hibberd, medical advisor to Newsmax, warned: ‘Francis may be slipping into a form of chronic heart failure common among victims of significant lung disorders such as COPD.’ ‘I have the impression that something is wrong,’ explained Dr. Liu Ming, a Chinese Taoist doctor who claims to have helped cure the future Pope from heart and liver problems. Finally, the Pope’s personal physician in Argentina had said he was ‘concerned’ about his patient’s health.”

In the June 29 issue of the Italian daily newspaper Libero, journalist Antonio Mastino published an article entitled “The Soap Opera of the Pope’s Health”. Here are a few excerpts translated from the version posted in French at the website Benoît et moi: “… But what are the reasons that led the Pope of ‘mercy’ to cancel his meeting with the sick ‘at the last minute’? ‘A mild indisposition,’ they said immediately at the Casa Santa Marta; but then another impromptu justification arrived, which partially contradicted the first, stating that he was only ‘very tired’. Excuse me? Either health or fatigue. Which is it? To judge by the annoyance of the director of the Gemelli Hospita, Maurizio Guizzardi, everything leads us to think that in his hearing someone proposed the first hypothesis. This is the opinion of the prelate of the papal household.” (Translator’s note: This was Monsignor Marini, to whom a journalist posed the question, “What is going on?” and who replied “If you yourselves don’t know….”).

“As for his health, just recently a Vaticanist who is at home at the Casa Santa Marta (Editor’s note: probably Andrea Tornielli, Vaticanist for La Stampa, who is very close to Francis), an extremely faithful member of Bergoglio’s circle, declared that the Pope ‘is very well; those who say that he is ill wish it were so….’ Anyway, Pope Francis is not new to these last-minute absences. Exactly one year ago, when the musicians were already set up for their concert ‘in honor of the Pope’ in Paul VI Hall, Francis, caring about nothing and no one, announced that he was not ‘a Renaissance prince’, and therefore concerts did not interest him, and he would skip it without even a note of apology. The musicians who had prepared for months in order to give the Pontiff evidence of their artistry played to an emblematically empty chair. Last February, another unexpected ‘mild indisposition’ caused him to skip ‘at the last minute’ the traditional annual meeting of the Pope with the students of the Roman Seminary, ‘the Pope’s seminary’, a meeting which, from time immemorial, no pope has ever missed. The Roman seminarians were disappointed.

“But what do these unexpected absences of Francis mean? A partial answer is found in a book-length interview from his time in Buenos Aires, in which these ‘last-minute’ program changes were familiar. (Translator’s note: It is a shame that Antonio Mastino does not cite the title.) The cardinal himself explained that ‘when I do not want to do something, to meet someone, I say that I am unwell: I like to meet whom I want, when I want.’ In practice his ‘mild indispositions’ are to be traced back to the variable humors, and perhaps to the sympathies and antipathies of Bergoglio. And indeed, another detail is obvious: this time again, Cardinal Angelo Scola, his direct rival at the conclave, is the one who suffers the consequences of Bergoglio’s ‘mild indispositions’. Twice already last year, after he had obtained an audience with Francis, ‘at the last minute’ he had someone tell him that he had ‘a mild indisposition’. An indisposition that some people by now think concerns Scola…. But the question remains: How is Francis doing? We have seen him remain until noon at his audiences with the faithful in excellent shape, just like the other times when he had called off meetings with Scola and others because of ‘unexpected indispositions’. The latest unofficial news about him goes back to a few minutes after his boycott of the Gemelli Hospital: he was strolling in the Vatican Gardens, chatting with some prelate from his entourage. At the Casa Santa Marta, they hasten to say that the Pope’s visit to Gemelli was not canceled but simply ‘postponed’. Who knows. Meanwhile, the soap opera continues.”

...The musicians who had prepared for months in order to give the Pontiff evidence of their artistry played to an emblematically empty chair....

Hint. Hint.

Heh...good one.

Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:22 pm

James Francis

Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 9:27 pmPosts: 80

Re: Bergoglio information

I thought that it was telling that Bergoglio openly admits that when he doesn't want to meet someone or do something he says that "he is ill"- in other words, pulling a sickie, or in other words, telling a lie.

This fellow is extraordinary.

Tue Aug 05, 2014 12:56 am

John Lane

Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pmPosts: 4335

Re: Bergoglio information

I agree, James. Selfish and dishonest. They'll canonise him as soon as his body is cold.

_________________In Christ our King.

Tue Aug 05, 2014 5:30 am

Alan Aversa

Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:40 amPosts: 438Location: Tucson, Arizona

Re: Bergoglio information

What's interesting about this article is that (1) it's by a sedeplenist and (2) he uses JPII's catechism to show that Francis is a false prophet:

In the first year of his pontificate, Pope Francis has undeniably shaken up the Catholic world with a dramatic change in approach and style as compared to his predecessors. While much of the mainstream media has been unified in singing praises on the pope’s efforts to “reform” the Church, responses within the Catholic faithful itself are not as unified. In fact, Catholic response to Pope Francis can be classified into three, distinct, emerging “camps”.

The first camp includes the more liberal elements within the Church who, like mainstream media, have leaped on the bandwagon, rejoicing at the seemingly more liberal attitude of the Catholic hierarchy on previously hot-button topics such as gay marriages and abortion.

The second camp includes those in the “middle” who, while recognising the radically different approach, nonetheless insist that the pope really hasn’t changed any Catholic doctrine. Instead, they say that the pope has a more “pastoral” approach, and the difference between him and previous pontiffs is more in terms of emphasis and style rather than substance, or doctrine.

The third camp includes those who are increasingly branded by mainstream media as the “far right”, the “conservatives”, who are alarmed at the dramatic contrast in approach by the current pontiff and his predecessors. Many “conservative” blogs and publications are increasingly pointing out that this is not just a subtle change in style we are witnessing – instead, they say, it is a powerful revolution slowly unveiling that is increasingly leading to fundamental changes not just in “style”, but in “substance”, or Church doctrine.

The key question, therefore, is this: Is Pope Francis actually re-defining Catholic doctrine? Has he made any substantial changes to Catholic doctrine that are fundamentally opposed to the Church’s traditional teachings as contained in the Catechism?

In this article, we examine five (5) teachings of Pope Francis which, upon closer scrutiny, appear to be efforts at re-defining certain important Catholic doctrines.

Can Atheists go to Heaven?

On May 21, 2013, Pope Francis created a global firestorm of religious debate as a result of a homily that talked about atheists. In that controversial homily, the pope essentially emphasized that what matters more is not so much our religious affiliation, but that “we do good”:

Quote:

If we, each doing our own part, if we do good to others, if we meet there, doing good, and we go slowly, gently, little by little, we will make that culture of encounter: we need that so much. We must meet one another doing good. “But I don’t believe, Father, I am an atheist!” But do good: we will meet one another there.

After that homily, headlines in major newspapers and mainstream press such as the New York Times screamed with the “big news” that according to the pope, even atheists can now go to heaven: all of us, including atheists, will “meet one another there [heaven]” for as long as we do good. Here are some examples of the various headlines that made it in major publications: “Heaven for atheists? Pope sparks debate”; “Is Pope Francis a heretic? No but he does raise questions”; “Pope Francis: ‘Even the atheists’ can go to heaven’.”

In a letter to Eugenio Scalfari, atheist founder and editor of La Republicca, Pope Francis expounded on this theme further, suggesting that all that matters for atheists is to “obey their own conscience”:

Quote:

The question for one who doesn’t believe in God lies in obeying one’s conscience. Sin, also for those who don’t have faith, exists when one goes against one’s conscience. To listen to and to obey it means, in fact, to decide in face of what is perceived as good or evil. And on this decision pivots the goodness or malice of our action.

There are two important points of Church teaching that we need to keep in mind when we read the Pope’s statement above:

• Atheism is a mortal sin• Salvation can only be attained through Jesus Christ, and through His Body, the Church

Atheism is a mortal sin. The Catechism of the Catholic Church clearly teaches that atheism is a mortal sin. Those who die without repenting of mortal sin go to hell. Therefore, atheists who die without repenting of their mortal sin cannot go to heaven. The Catechism clearly states this:“Atheism must therefore be regarded as one of the most serious problems of our time…Since it rejects or denies the existence of God, atheism is a sin against the virtue of religion.” (Part 3, Section 2, Chapter 1, #2123)

We also recall the words of Jesus Himself, who emphasised that loving God is the first and the greatest of all the commandments:

Quote:

And one of them, a doctor of the Law, putting him to the test, asked him, “Master, which is the great commandment in the Law?” Jesus said to him, “‘Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind.’ This is the greatest and the first commandment. And the second is like it, ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.’ On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets.”(Matthew 22:35-40)

Rather than warning atheists of the dangers of remaining in a state of mortal sin, or giving them proofs for the existence of God, the pope instead implies that being an atheist is all right: for as long as they “obey their own conscience” (even if this “conscience” tells them that God doesn’t exist).

Salvation can only be attained through Jesus Christ. This is the very foundation of Christianity and our Faith. Our Faith clearly states that those who do not repent and believe in Jesus cannot be saved: “I am the way, the truth, and the light. No one comes to the Father but through Me.” Therefore, atheists who do not repent and ask Jesus for mercy cannot be saved. Furthermore, the Church teaches that all salvation comes from Christ, the Head, through the Catholic Church which is His body. Therefore, they cannot be saved who, with full knowledge of the Church as founded by Christ and necessary for salvation, refuse to enter or remain in the Church.

The Previously Condemned Liberation Theology Movement is Back

Liberation Theology is a political and theological movement which originated in Latin America. The movement interprets the teachings of Jesus Christ in relation to a liberation from unjust economic, political, or social conditions. The term was coined in 1971 by the Peruvian priest Gustavo Gutiérrez, widely regarded as the founder of the movement. He wrote one of the movement’s most famous books, “A Theology of Liberation”. It has been criticized as a Marxist interpretation of the gospel, focusing on freedom from material poverty and injustice rather than giving primacy to spiritual freedom.

Both John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI condemned Liberation Theology. In a 1979 speech given to the Latin American bishops conference, John Paul II criticised the movement, saying “this conception of Christ, as a political figure, a revolutionary, as the subversive of Nazareth, does not tally with the Church’s catechism”.

In 1984, then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, issued an Instruction on Liberation Theology entitled“Liberatis Nuntius”. In the document, Ratzinger condemned the movement, clarifying in unequivocal terms the Church’s position: “An analysis of the phenomenon of liberation theology reveals that it constitutes afundamental threat to the faith of the Church.”

More recently, on 7 March 2014, the Catholic News Agency published excerpts of an interview with Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI conducted by an Italian newspaper, in which Benedict called Liberation Theology a“falsification of the Christian faith”. Referring to Liberation Theology, he said:

Quote:

It [Liberation Theology] was an error. Poverty and the poor were, without a doubt, set at the center of Liberation Theology, yet in a very specific perspective…It was said that it was not a question of help or of reforms, but rather of the great upheaval from which a new world would spring…the Christian faith was being used as a motor for this revolutionary movement, transforming it into a political force…A falsification of the Christian faith needed to be opposed precisely for the sake of the poor and in favor of the service rendered to them.

What is wrong with Liberation Theology, and why did previous pontiffs condemn it?

First, Liberation Theology was considered by many as a dangerous re-packaging of Marxism – the underlying philosophy behind the scourge of communism which has driven billions of people to atheism. Many statements written by Gutierrez in his book “A Theology of Liberation” were condemned by then Cardinal Ratzinger for their Marxist tone. Gutierrez went so far as to call for a “socialist society” to come to pass:

Quote:

Only a radical break with the present state of things, a profound transformation of the property system, the access to power by the exploited class, a social revolution that breaks up that dependence, will allow a different society, a Socialist society to come to pass.

Another great error of the movement is that it puts liberation from earthly injustice as the topmost priority of Christianity; liberation from sin is de-emphasised. Then Cardinal Ratzinger, however, emphasised that sin, not human injustice or poverty, is the greatest evil:

Quote:

New Testament revelation teaches us that sin is the greatest evil, since it strikes man in the heart of his personality. The first liberation, to which all others must make reference, is that from sin…the most radical form of slavery is slavery to sin. Other forms of slavery find their deepest root in slavery to sin. That is why freedom in the full Christian sense, characterized by the life in the Spirit, cannot be confused with a license to give in to the desires of the flesh…it is significant that the term “freedom” is often replaced in Scripture by the very closely related term, “redemption”.

Under Pope Francis, however, the Liberation Theology movement is making a dramatic comeback. Yes, this movement, described by previous pontiffs as a “fundamental threat to the faith of the Church”, is very much back in the spotlight.

In early September 2013, the Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, published an interview with Gutierrez, an article written by Gutierrez himself, as well as two other articles praising his work – one of them by the current prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Archbishop Gerhard L. Muller. Archbishop Muller, a close friend of Gutierrez, supports the movement, saying: “The Latin American ecclesial and theological movement known as ‘Liberation Theology’, which spread to other parts of the world after the Second Vatican Council, should in my opinion be included among the most important currents in 20th century Catholic theology.”

One of Pope Francis’ earliest gestures was to invite Gutierrez himself to Rome. In their meeting in Rome on September 11, 2013, Francis and Gutierrez celebrated Mass together, then had breakfast. Not long after that meeting with Gutierrez, Pope Francis revived the stalled beatification case of another exponent of Liberation Theology – Oscar Romero, the Archbishop of El Salvador assassinated in 1980. More recently, on February 20, 2014, Gutierrez was invited to speak in a high-profile event in the Vatican (which coincided with all the Cardinals of the world visiting the Vatican for the installation of 19 new Cardinals) – the launch of a book by Archbishop Muller, the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Some observers have also noted that the movement is close to becoming official doctrine of the Church under “Evangelii Gaudium”, the Pope’s first apostolic exhortation. The document sparked much controversy, particularly in the West for its condemnation of capitalism, with some conservative Americans, such as the famous US radio commentator Rush Limbaugh even saying that the Pope was preaching “pure Marxism”.

The Church is Like Mary and Has Flaws

In a General Audience on September 11, 2013, Pope Francis gave a Catechesis on the Church and the Blessed Virgin Mary, where he gave a questionable analogy between the Church which “has defects”, and Mary:

Quote:

The Church and the Virgin Mary are mothers, both of them; what is said of the Church can be said also of Our Lady and what is said of Our Lady can also be said of the Church…Do we love the Church as we love our mothers, also taking into account her defects? All mothers have defects, we all have defects, but when we speak of our mother’s defects we gloss over them, we love her as she is. And the Church also has her defects: but we love her just as a mother. Do we help her to be more beautiful, more authentic, more in harmony with the Lord?

The above is a very subtle re-definition of both the dogma of the Immaculate Conception (proclaimed by Pius IX in 1854), and the doctrine of the Church’s own perfect sanctity. If we were to re-construct the above statement, the unstated conclusion (which the readers are left to infer) is that Our Lady has defects and is not “spotless”:

• Pope Francis: “…what is said of the Church can be said also of Our Lady.”• Pope Francis: “the Church also has her defects…”• Unstated Conclusion (Reader): Therefore, Our Lady also has her defects.

Again, although the conclusion is not clearly stated, the inevitable flow of the argumentation subtly leads the reader to reach the conclusion that Mary is “flawed” and has “defects”, just like the Church which also has defects. This is contrary to the Church teaching on the dogma of the Immaculate Conception:

Quote:

Because Mary was destined to be the Mother of the Son of God, and because it was repugnant that God should have any contact, however indirect, with sin, Mary was preserved from the very first moment of her existence from the spiritual darkness of original sin. Therefore, from the very instant of her conception in the womb of her mother Anna, Mary was in union with God, her soul was flooded with His love, she was in the state of sanctifying grace.

Church teaching is clear: The Mother of God is flawless, without sin: she is Immaculate. As such, Mary is the Mother of the Church and our model. In his Apostolic Exhortation Signum Magnum given May 13, 1967, Pope Paul VI emphasised that “Mary is the Mother of the Church – not only because she is the mother of Jesus Christ…but also because she ‘shines as the model of virtues for the whole community of the elect.’”

Another important teaching to remember is that of the doctrine of the Church’s own perfect sanctity. The Catechism of the Catholic Church emphasises that despite the sinfulness of the Church’s members, the Church herself is without any flaws – she is “unfailingly holy.” Below is the exact textfrom the Catechism on this teaching:

Quote:

The Church . . . is held, as a matter of faith, to be unfailingly holy. This is because Christ, the Son of God, who with the Father and the Spirit is hailed as ‘alone holy,’ loved the Church as his Bride, giving himself up for her so as to sanctify her; he joined her to himself as his body and endowed her with the gift of the Holy Spirit for the glory of God. The Church, then, is “the holy People of God,” and her members are called “saints.” (Part 1, Section 2, Chapter 3, Article 9, #823)

Pope Piux XI, in his encyclical Divini Illius Magistri, said:

Quote:

…the Church, although human faults can be found in her, is always the Church of Christ, and, as such, true and infallible in preserving and transmitting the sacred deposit of faith, that is, of truth and heavenly grace; and she is holy…

Pope Pius XII, on the other hand, said:

Quote:

Certainly the loving Mother is spotless in the Sacraments, by which she gives birth to and nourishes her children; in the faith which she has always preserved inviolate; in her sacred laws imposed on all; in the evangelical counsels which she recommends; in those heavenly gifts and extraordinary graces through which, with inexhaustible fecundity, she generates hosts of martyrs, virgins and confessors. But it cannot be laid to her charge if some members fall, weak or wounded.

“We need not be afraid” of the Last Judgement

In a general audience given on December 11, 2013, Pope Francis gave a Catechesis on the Last Judgement that, upon closer inspection, is essentially a reversal of important aspects of the Church’s official teaching on the matter.

Before we go into the details of the Pope’s catechesis, let us first understand: What is the Church’s official teaching on the Last Judgement?

The Catechism of the Catholic Church has a very specific teaching on the Last Judgement: “The Last Judgment will come when Christ returns in glory. Only the Father knows the day and the hour; only he determines the moment of its coming. Then through his Son Jesus Christ he will pronounce the final word on all history…” (Part 1, Section 2, Chapter 3, Article 12, #1040)

The Last Judgement is the hour when Christ will come

Quote:

in his glory, and all the angels with him. . . . Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate them one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats, and he will place the sheep at his right hand, but the goats at the left. . . . And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life. (#1038)

The Catechism emphasizes that a holy fear of the Last Judgement is important and fruitful to our souls: “The message of the Last Judgment calls men to conversion while God is still giving them ‘the acceptable time, . . . the day of salvation.’ It inspires a holy fear of God…”

Various saints have emphasised the importance of this holy fear in the final judgement of the Lord during His Second Coming. Saint Jerome said: “As often as I consider the Day of Judgment, I Tremble. Whether I Eat, or Drink, or whatever else I do, that Terrible Trumpet appears to Sound in my Ears,‘Arise, ye Dead, and Come to Judgment’’’.

An important point to remember is that at the day of the Last Judgement, our relatives, the saints, even the Blessed Mother can no longer intervene on our behalf, as the time of mercy shall have ceased. For unrepentant sinners, Jesus shall not be a merciful saviour at that stage, but a terrible judge. Saint Alphonsus de Ligouri said:

Quote:

Oh! how Great, shall be the Agony-of the Reprobate, at the Sight-of the Judge! “At their Presence”, says the Prophet Joel, “the People shall be in Grievous Pains” – Joel 2:6. According-to Saint Jerome, the Presence-of Jesus Christ, will Give the Reprobate, more Pain than Hell itself. “It would”, he says, “be easier for the Damned to Bear the Torments of Hell, than the Presence of the Lord”.

To summarize, therefore, there are three important things to remember with regard to the Church’s teaching on the Last Judgement:

• The Last Judgement is an event that will happen at the end of time when Jesus returns in glory• A holy fear of the Last Judgement is important and spiritually fruitful• Jesus will not be a merciful saviour at the Last Judgement; instead He will be the Just Judge. At that stage, nobody can intercede anymore on our behalf as the time of mercy shall have ceased

In his December 11 Catechesis, Pope Francis emphasised that “we need not be afraid” of the Last Judgement. Below are some important points he made which, upon closer inspection, are a subtle re-definition of the Church teaching on the Last Judgement:

Official Church Teaching: The Last Judgement is an event that will happen at the end of time when Jesus returns in glory

Pope Francis:“…this final judgement is already in progress, it begins now over the course of our lives… We…in a certain sense, can become judges of ourselves, by condemning ourselves to exclusion from communion with God and with the brethren.”

Official Church Teaching: At the Last Judgement, Jesus will not be a merciful Savior, but a Just Judge.

Pope Francis:“…at the moment of judgement, we will not be left alone…How beautiful it is to know that at that juncture, in addition to Christ, our Paraclete, our Advocate with the Father…we will be able to count on the intercession and goodness of so many of our elder brothers and sisters who have gone before us on the journey of faith.”

Official Church Teaching: A holy fear of the Last Judgement is important and spiritually fruitful

Pope Francis: “We need not be afraid…Whenever we think of Christ’s return and of his final judgement…we seem to find ourselves before a mystery which towers above us…A mystery which almost instinctively arouses a sense of fear in us, and perhaps even one of trepidation…the whole of Christian revelation culminates…at Jesus’ embrace, which is the fullness of life and the fullness of love…If we think of judgement in this perspective, all fear and hesitation fade and make room for expectation and deep joy.”

What the Pope has done in his December 11, 2013 Catechesis, therefore, is to subtly re-define the very meaning of the Last Judgement:

• Instead of an event that will happen at Jesus’ Second Coming, the Last Judgement is “already in progress, it begins now over the course of our lives.”• Instead of emphasising a holy fear of the Last Judgement, we“need not be afraid.” • Instead of clearly understanding that at the Last Judgement, Jesus will come not as a merciful saviour, but as a Just Judge, we need not be afraid, since the Last Judgement “culminates…at Jesus’ embrace, which is the fullness of life and the fullness of love…” We need not be afraid, since “…at the moment of judgement, we will not be left alone…How beautiful it is to know that at that juncture, in addition to Christ, our Paraclete, our Advocate with the Father…we will be able to count on the intercession and goodness of so many of our elder brothers and sisters who have gone before us on the journey of faith.“

The issue with the above interpretation of the Last Judgement is that it discourages people from having a holy fear of God’s justice. Why bother with repentance and conversion from mortal sin – anyway, the Last Judgement “culminates…at Jesus’ embrace”, right?

While He is a merciful God, the Church clearly emphasises another Divine attribute: His Justice. On the Last Judgement, God’s mercy ceases – at the Second Coming, Jesus comes not as a merciful Saviour, but as a Just Judge. As the Catechism says: “The message of the Last Judgment calls men to conversion while God is still giving them ‘the acceptable time, . . . the day of salvation.’ It inspires a holy fear of God…” A holy fear of God’s justice on the day of judgement is important!

Is There an Absolute Right and Wrong?

In September 2013, Pope Francis wrote a letter to Eugenio Scalfari, atheist founder and editor of the Italian publication La Republicca. This letter, together with a subsequent face-to-face interview conducted by Scalfari with the Pope, sparked massive media coverage – and widespread controversy. After much debate and controversy, the original text of the interview was taken down from the Vatican website.

During the one-on-one interview, Scalfari asked the pope: “Your Holiness, is there only one vision of the Good? And who determines what it is?”

The Pope answered:

Quote:

Each one of us has his own vision of the Good and also of Evil. We have to urge it [the vision] to move towards what one perceives as the Good…I repeat it. Everyone has his own idea of Good and Evil and he has to choose to follow the Good and to fight Evil as he understands it. This would be enough to improve the world.

The Pope’s statement above is moral relativism – a dangerous heresy that, if adopted by the world, will cause widespread adoption of sin. To say that“each one of us has his own vision of the Good and also of Evil” is to give everyone the license to do whatever he or she wants to do in this life – it gives everyone the license to sin.

You can do absolutely whatever you want in this life – commit an abortion, kill, commit slander, steal – for as long as your action is aligned with your“own vision of the good and also of evil.” In other words, there are no absolute truths. There are no absolute moral codes of conduct. No institution, no Church has the right to definitely say what is right and what is wrong. The Ten Commandments are not relevant – each one of us can write our own version of the Ten Commandments. Everyone is free to judge for himself what is good and what is bad.

Pope Francis’ above position on moral relativism is a complete reversal to Pope Benedict XVI’s view that moral relativism is a danger that the Church must fight. Just before the College of Cardinals entered the 2005 conclave to vote on the successor to John Paul II, then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, dean of the College of Cardinals, warned against the dangers of moral relativism:“A dictatorship of relativism is being formed, one that recognises nothing as definitive and that has as its measure only the self and its desires.”

Doctrinal Error Veiled in Partial Truth is a Grave Danger

Pope Clement XIII once warned about the seriousness of doctrinal error veiled in partial truth, warning that “diabolical error, when it has artfully colored its lies, easily clothes itself in the likeness of truth while very brief additions or changes corrupt the meaning of expressions; and confession, which usually works salvation, sometimes, with a slight change, inches toward death.”

Pope Pius VI likewise warned against doctrinal “innovators” who

Quote:

sought to hide the subtleties of their tortuous maneuvers by the use of seemingly innocuous words such as would allow them to insinuate error into souls in the most gentle manner. Once the truth had been compromised, they could, by means of slight changes or additions in phraseology, distort the confession of the faith that is necessary for our salvation, and lead the faithful by subtle errors to their eternal damnation.

Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich once saw a vision of a future false church in the period preceding the Second Coming of Our Lord Jesus: “I saw also the relationship between two popes…I saw how baleful would be the consequences of this false church. I saw it increase in size; heretics of every kind came into the city of Rome.”

Are we perhaps living in the end times prophesied in the Book of Revelation – the time of the emergence of the “false prophet” and the “antichrist” that will precede the Second Coming of Our Lord? Let us be watchful and vigilant.

Next they'll remind us that he isn't a manifest heretic, because we can't be sure. And when we say we are sure, they'll tell us that we need to be more charitable. It won't occur to them that, filled with charity, one doesn't write articles exposing the pope's heresies unless one is sure.

(Vatican Radio) We ask for a lot of things when we pray, but the greatest gift that God can give us is the Holy Spirit. This was Pope Francis’ reflection Thursday morning at Mass in Santa Marta, commenting on the Gospel of the day, which presents the parable of the man who gets what he needs because of his persistence.

Pope Francis began his homily by noting that “God has so much mercy” and observing that in the Collect we begin by asking God for forgiveness and to "obtain what prayer does not dare to hope for":

"This got me thinking: it is precisely the mercy of God not only to forgive - we all know that - but to be generous and give more and more ... We asked: 'And obtain what prayer does not dare to hope for'. When we pray we might ask for this [intention] or that [intention] and He always gives us more, much more!”.

The Pope underlined three key words in the Gospel: "Friend, the Father and gift". Jesus shows the disciples what prayer is. It is like a man who goes to a friend at midnight asking for something. In life - he observes - "There are truest friends" who really give their all. "There are others who are good friends more or less", but the Bible tells us, 'one, two, or three ... no more!'. Then, others who are friends, but not like these". And even if we are demanding and intrusive "the bond of friendship means that we are given what we ask".

"Jesus goes a step further and speaks of the Father: What father among you would hand his son a snake when he asks for a fish? Or hand him a scorpion when he asks for an egg? If you then, who are wicked, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him?'".

The Pope continued - "not only the friend who accompanies us on our journey of life helps us and gives us what we ask, but Our Father in heaven" who "loves us so much and of whom Jesus said that He cares about feeding the birds in the field. Jesus wants to awaken faith in prayer" and says: "Ask and you will receive; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks, receives; and the one who seeks, finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened ". "This - says Pope Francis - is the prayer: ask, seek and knock at the heart of God." And the Father "gifts the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!".

"This is the gift, this is God’s added extra. God never gives you a gift, something that you ask for, without wrapping it up well, without adding something extra to make it even more beautiful. And that little bit more that the Lord, the Father gives us, is the Spirit. The true gift of the Father is the one that prayer does not dare to hope for. 'I ask for this grace; I ask for this, I knock and pray so much... I only hope that you will give me this'. And He who is Father, will give me that and more: He will give me the gift of the Holy Spirit".

"You pray - said the Pope - with a friend, who is your companion on life's journey, you pray with the Father and you pray in the Holy Spirit. The friend is Jesus":

"He accompanies us and teaches us to pray. And our prayer should be Trinitarian. So often [people ask]: 'But do you believe?': 'Yes! Yes! '; 'What do you believe in?'; 'In God!'; 'But what is God for you?'; 'God, God'. But God does not exist: Do not be shocked! So God does not exist! There is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, they are persons, they are not some vague idea in the clouds ... This God spray does not exist! The three persons exist! Jesus is our companion on the journey who gives us what we ask; the Father who cares for us and loves us; and the Holy Spirit is the gift, the extra gift from the Father, that our consciousness does not dare to hope for".

(from Vatican Radio)

All his polyester pomps and miscellaneous bad taste aside, the perversion of Sacred Theology concerning the Holy Trinity increasingly seems to be the hallmark heresy of Bergoglio's nontificate.

"He accompanies us and teaches us to pray. And our prayer should be Trinitarian. So often [people ask]: 'But do you believe?': 'Yes! Yes! '; 'What do you believe in?'; 'In God!'; 'But what is God for you?'; 'God, God'. But God does not exist: Do not be shocked! So God does not exist! There is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, they are persons, they are not some vague idea in the clouds ... This God spray does not exist! The three persons exist! Jesus is our companion on the journey who gives us what we ask; the Father who cares for us and loves us; and the Holy Spirit is the gift, the extra gift from the Father, that our consciousness does not dare to hope for".

So, extreme personalism leads to tritheism?

That quote seems related to what I posted before, where he downplayed the necessity of knowing God exists, saying:

Bergoglio wrote:

I dare say that today the primary question we must face is not so much the problem of God – the existence, the knowledge of God – but the problem of the human, of human knowledge and finding in humans themselves the mark that God has made, so as to be able to meet with Him.

In a move that could be aimed at healing a rift between science and religion, Pope Francis has said that evolution and the Big Bang are consistent with the notion of a creator. And according to the pontiff, believers should not view God as "a magician, with a magic wand."

Francis made the remarks at an assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, billed as meeting to discuss "Evolving Concepts of Nature."

"When we read about Creation in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so," Francis told the gathering, where he also dedicated a statue of his predecessor, Benedict XVI. God, Francis said, "created human beings and let them develop according to the internal laws that he gave to each one so they would reach their fulfillment."

To be sure, the Catholic Church's views on the origins of the universe and life, unlike those of many Protestant sects, have for years been largely in line with the scientific consensus. The church has long leaned toward what some describe as "theistic evolution," i.e., a God supernaturally created the universe and life but allowed natural processes to work over billions of years.

In 1950, Pope Pius XII proclaimed that evolution was not at odds with Catholic teachings, and Pope John Paul II endorsed the view himself in 1996.

However, Pope Benedict hinted at accommodating "intelligent design," a form of creationism that has become popular in many religious circles in recent decades.

(As an aside, a recent Chapman University survey showed that more Americans believe in the lost civilization of Atlantis and that "UFOs are probably spaceships" than in evolution, and that as many people believed in Bigfoot as in the Big Bang.)

The Associated Press notes: "Francis has gone out of his way to embrace Benedict even as he steers the church on a vastly different course than that charted by the German theologian."

Francis' remarks are in keeping with a more open view he has taken to church matters and the intersection between the spiritual and secular worlds since becoming pope last year.

He has downplayed the importance of such hot-button issues as abortion, contraception and gay marriage, denounced the "cult of money," and even said that atheists can be redeemed.

But earlier this month, a group of bishops meeting at the Vatican showed that the church as a whole remains deeply divided on many of those issues.

In a move that could be aimed at healing a rift between science and religion, Pope Francis has said that evolution and the Big Bang are consistent with the notion of a creator. And according to the pontiff, believers should not view God as "a magician, with a magic wand."

Francis made the remarks at an assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, billed as meeting to discuss "Evolving Concepts of Nature."

"When we read about Creation in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so," Francis told the gathering, where he also dedicated a statue of his predecessor, Benedict XVI. God, Francis said, "created human beings and let them develop according to the internal laws that he gave to each one so they would reach their fulfillment."

To be sure, the Catholic Church's views on the origins of the universe and life, unlike those of many Protestant sects, have for years been largely in line with the scientific consensus. The church has long leaned toward what some describe as "theistic evolution," i.e., a God supernaturally created the universe and life but allowed natural processes to work over billions of years.

In 1950, Pope Pius XII proclaimed that evolution was not at odds with Catholic teachings, and Pope John Paul II endorsed the view himself in 1996.

However, Pope Benedict hinted at accommodating "intelligent design," a form of creationism that has become popular in many religious circles in recent decades.

(As an aside, a recent Chapman University survey showed that more Americans believe in the lost civilization of Atlantis and that "UFOs are probably spaceships" than in evolution, and that as many people believed in Bigfoot as in the Big Bang.)

The Associated Press notes: "Francis has gone out of his way to embrace Benedict even as he steers the church on a vastly different course than that charted by the German theologian."

Francis' remarks are in keeping with a more open view he has taken to church matters and the intersection between the spiritual and secular worlds since becoming pope last year.

He has downplayed the importance of such hot-button issues as abortion, contraception and gay marriage, denounced the "cult of money," and even said that atheists can be redeemed.

But earlier this month, a group of bishops meeting at the Vatican showed that the church as a whole remains deeply divided on many of those issues.

"When we read about Creation in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so," Francis told the gathering...

Otherwise, is there anything objectionable about this article besides the contradiction of "theistic evoloution"?

He is implying that God is not able to do everything. This is an example of Freemasonry's strategy of being ambiguous in order for the words to mean different things to different people. The liberals can say God is not able to create everything out of nothing. The conservatives can say that he doesn't mean that, he only means to say that a natural explanation of origins is compatible with Church doctrine. But either way, it's in contradiction to Pope St. Pius X's Pontifical Biblical Commission which almost all Conciliarists reject regardless of their political affiliation. But worse than that it is a subtle attack on the omnipotence of God.

Wed Oct 29, 2014 9:20 pm

Alan Aversa

Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:40 amPosts: 438Location: Tucson, Arizona

Re: Bergoglio information

ClemensMaria wrote:

He is implying that God is not able to do everything. This is an example of Freemasonry's strategy of being ambiguous in order for the words to mean different things to different people. The liberals can say God is not able to create everything out of nothing. The conservatives can say that he doesn't mean that, he only means to say that a natural explanation of origins is compatible with Church doctrine. But either way, it's in contradiction to Pope St. Pius X's Pontifical Biblical Commission which almost all Conciliarists reject regardless of their political affiliation. But worse than that it is a subtle attack on the omnipotence of God.

And my most charitable interpretation of it is that God can only do what is logically possible…

"In June 2010, a month before Argentina legalized same-sex marriage, [then-Cardinal] Bergoglio wrote a letter to the Carmelite Nuns of the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires in which he stated that a marriage equality bill before the South American nation’s legislature was the work of the devil and that fight against gay marriage is 'a war of God.'"

So he was against "marriage equality" as presented to the Argentine parliament. I think he still is, based upon what I have read. He's in favour of something else - a kind of eighth (secular) sacrament, "civil unions" which are not marriage. This will meet the demands of the world, and avoid a particular doctrinal clash - that is, the definition of marriage. He's side-stepping that problem.

Francis reaffirmed the Catholic Church's opposition to gay marriage on Wednesday, but suggested in a newspaper interview that it could support some types of civil unions.

The Pope reiterated the church's longstanding teaching that "marriage is between a man and a woman." However, he said, "We have to look at different cases and evaluate them in their variety."

States, for instance, justify civil unions as a way to provide economic security to cohabitating couples, the Pope said in a wide-ranging interview published Wednesday in Corriere della Sera, an Italian daily. State-sanctioned unions are thus driven by the need to ensure rights like access to health care, Francis added.

A number of Catholic bishops have supported civil unions for same-sex couples as an alternative to marriage, including Pope Francis when he was Archbishop of Buenos Aires in 2010, according to reports in National Catholic Reporter and The New York Times.

There is plenty of very clear evidence for this distinction. So this is his doctrinal agenda, to be pursued chiefly by actions and significant gestures.

Pope Francis declared recently in his regular weekly address at St. Peter's Square that animals go to heaven. He made the statement while trying to comfort a boy who was upset about the death of his pet dog.

Quoting several biblical passages as evidence that animals go to heaven, Pope Francis said, "The holy scripture teaches us that the fulfillment of this wonderful design also affects everything around us... what lies ahead... is therefore a new creation... It is not an annihilation of the universe and all that surrounds us. Rather it brings everything to its fullness of being, truth and beauty."

The 77-year-old pontiff then concluded: "One day we will see our animals again in eternity of Christ. Paradise is open to all God’s creatures."

Reacting to Francis' statement, the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera wrote optimistically that the pontiff had effectively declared an expansive "hope of salvation and eschatological beatitude to animals and the whole of creation."

While the declaration from the controversial pontiff might have brought consolation and relief to animal-loving Catholics who have mourned the loss of a pet, it probably caused Church conservatives more hand-wringing over their fears about their pope’s escalating "liberalism."

Soon after Francis made the statement, the Italian company Eurolactic Italia, which produces donkey milk as alternative nutriment for babies allergic to human and cow milk, presented him with two donkeys, Thea and Noah, as Christmas presents.

Media reports quoted an official of the company, Pierluigi Christophe Orunesu, saying that Francis confessed that he loves donkey’s milk having consumed it as child. Thea and Noah would no doubt be in heaven to provide the pontiff a constant supply of milk.

Francis' declaration that "heaven is open to all God’s creatures" could be interpreted by the theologically naive only as a statement expressing the sincere feelings of an animal lover. But it is one sufficient to spark an acrimonious debate till kingdom come among church theologians who have hitherto assumed that the privileges of heavenly beatitude are reserved exclusively for humans.Pope Francis selfieReuters/L'Osservatore Roman Pope Francis participating in a selfie at the Vatican.

The notion of animals going to heaven is one that church leaders and theologians immersed in anthropocentric biblical worldviews have apparently never given much thought to. The question of what happens to our favorite pooches and moggies after death only began assuming significant dimensions recently with the Christianity Today, in 2012, raising the question, "Do Pets Go to Heaven?"

But soon after publication of the article, Pope Francis' predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, moved quickly to slam shut firmly the pearly gates of heaven against animals, declaring in the midst of his brief papal tenure, that animals are "not called to the eternal life," and pointing out that animals are never mentioned in connection with salvation and eternal life in the Christian scriptures.

But how do we resolve the contradiction between the statements of two equally infallible vice-regents of God on Earth?

Benedict's predecessor, Pope John Paul II, is reported to have said in 1990 that "...animals possess a soul" and "in this respect, man, created by the hand of God, is identical with all other living creatures."

However, Pope John Paul II offered no inspired papal insights into the animal hereafter, thus empowering Benedict to declare in effect, and in line with church tradition, that only humans have immortal souls.

While animal lovers quote Isaiah 11:6, which says that in the life hereafter "the wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the young goat, and the calf and the lion and the fattened calf together," others sidestep the inconvenient verse, pointing out that the bible makes it clear inMark 16:16that only "he that believes and is baptized shall be saved."

In truth, the Apostles never baptized or preached the gospel to chickens, dogs and cats. Even human gentiles were granted the boon of heavenly afterlife only as an afterthought; that is, after the Jews rejected the message.

Ultimately, the notion that animals go to heaven raises a medley of theological riddles for those with the leisure to indulge in unbridled rumination over the spiritual mysteries of existence:

If animals go to heaven, do they also go to hell? Will my donkey suffer eternal damnation for that well-aimed kick at my groin, or my pitbull hellfire for attacking my toddler son? Will my hen go to perdition for cracking and eating its own egg, effectively aborting its own offspring in the womb?

What about earthworms, the bacteria in my gut, HIV and Ebola viruses that have caused untold suffering to humanity?

And where does God draw the line in the hierarchy of animal lifeforms that separates those eligible for afterlife from those not sufficiently evolved to benefit from the comforts of heavenly bliss?

On the contrary, do non-human life forms have an assured automatic ticket to heaven for lacking a moralizing intellect?

Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:37 am

James Schroepfer

Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 4:53 pmPosts: 100

Re: Bergoglio information

If all people and all animals go to Heaven, and probably all plants, what was the purpose of creating earth?

Thu Dec 11, 2014 12:55 pm

Alan Aversa

Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:40 amPosts: 438Location: Tucson, Arizona

Re: Bergoglio information

James Schroepfer wrote:

If all people and all animals go to Heaven, and probably all plants, what was the purpose of creating earth?

Editor's note: A previous version of this story, citing a newspaper, attributed a quote to Pope Francis. The quote actually comes from Pope Paul VI.

(CNN) -- Can animals go to heaven?

Some people all over the world have been excited in recent days about reports by news agencies worldwide -- including one from CNN -- declaring that Pope Francis apparently believes they can.

It turns out it's unclear what he believes about this.

A previous pope, Paul VI, had no doubts. "One day we will again see our animals in the eternity of Christ," Paul once told a boy grieving the loss of his pet.Photos: Pope Francis Photos: Pope Francis

That quote, from the pontiff who reigned from 1963 until his death in 1978, was inaccurately attributed to Francis.

The confusion may have begun when Italian daily newspaper Corriere della Sera referred to Paul's quote in a story that carried the headline, "The pope and animals: 'Heaven is open to all creatures.'"

The story itself does not indicate Francis said that. Instead, it refers back to Paul VI.

The writer for the newspaper pointed to something Francis actually did say: "Sacred Scripture teaches us that the fulfillment of this marvelous plan cannot but involve everything that surrounds us and came from the heart and mind of God."

That remark, the writer suggested, "widened the hope of salvation" to animals and all of creation.

The headline on the article quoted Francis as saying, "Heaven is open to all creatures." But there's no sign Francis said that.

A search through the current Pope's writings and remarks showed no immediate sign that he has taken a clear position on the question.

Pope Francis to visit United States for first time next fall

While Catholic teachings don't reject the notion that animals have souls, traditional dogma has long held that animals don't go to heaven.

Amy Kitchens Pollick of Decatur, Alabama, shared an anecdote from her childhood on Friday. When she was 10 years old, death claimed her beloved cat, Big Tom.

Her father had tears in his eyes when he told her, "Now Little One. The Bible says the Lord sees even every sparrow that falls," Pollick wrote on Facebook. "If He sees every sparrow, He's not going to forget about a good old kitty like Big Tom.'"

"I've held that in my heart ever since," she wrote.

Sun Dec 14, 2014 2:25 am

John Lane

Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pmPosts: 4335

Re: Bergoglio information

Joe Cupertino wrote:

Apparently Bergoglio didn't actually say what he was said to have said in news stories this week, like the story I previous posted.

No, he doesn't bother with such harmless heresies. He's got much bigger ones to spread around.

_________________In Christ our King.

Sun Dec 14, 2014 6:30 am

James Francis

Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 9:27 pmPosts: 80

Re: Bergoglio information

Is there a way of reading this that doesn't have Jorge praying for someone to sin?

“Even our life can become like that, even our life. And sometimes, I confess something to you, when I have seen a Christian, a Christian of that kind, with a weak heart, not firm, not fixed on the rock—Jesus – and with such rigidness on the outside, I ask the Lord: ‘But Lord, throw a banana peel in front of them, so that they will take a good fall, and feel shame that they are sinners, and so encounter You, [and realize] that You are the Saviour. Many times a sin will make us feel shame, and make us encounter the Lord, Who pardons us, as the sick who were there and went to the Lord for healing."

Wed Dec 17, 2014 7:09 am

Thomas Williams

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 9:15 pmPosts: 60

Re: Bergoglio information

Bergoglio played a major role in the US-Cuba policy realignment:

Quote:

The two secret heroes of the US-Cuba deal: Pope Francis and CanadaUpdated by Max Fisher on December 17, 2014, 12:35 p.m. ET

The historic deal to begin normalizing relations between the US and Cuba, after 50-plus years of hostility, is being credited primarily to President Obama and Raul Castro, Cuba's current de facto leader and the brother of Fidel. That is with good reason: Obama has been working on this issue throughout much of his presidency and Castro is taking a significant risk by allowing wider Internet access into Cuba as part of the deal.

But there are two actors that quietly played a major role in this: Canada and Pope Francis.

Canada's crucial role in hosting the talks

The negotiations that led to today's announcement, in which the US and Cuba will take major steps toward normalization, took 18 long months, according to a report in the New York Times. And many of those negotiations were held in Canada, formally but secretly hosted by the Canadian government.

Canada was helping to solve two crucial problems. First, the talks needed to remain secret to have any hope of succeeding — had they leaked, the political backlash in the US would have almost certainly killed the deal.

Second, for diplomatic reasons, the talks could not be held on US or Cuban soil, but the negotiators needed a physical meeting place. The Canadian government, which unlike the US does have ties with Cuba but is also extremely close to the US government, was an obviously attractive broker for the US. While Canadian officials did not officially participate in the talks, their role in providing a secret and official channel was crucial, according to US officials.

The Pope actively participated in getting the deal

If Canada was essential for providing the Americans with a safe and secure forum for talks, then Pope Francis played a similar role in helping to bring the Cuban leaders to the negotiating table. And, unlike Canadian officials, who did not sit at from the formal talks, Vatican officials participated actively in discussions.

Pope Francis' role included sending a personal letter to both Obama and Raul Castro over the summer urging them to reach a deal (talks were already ongoing at that point). Francis also reportedly raised the issue repeatedly in his meeting with Obama in March. And Francis hosted the final negotiation session at the Vatican, where Vatican officials participated in the talks.

Pope Francis has an obvious and very important role to play in talks, especially in building trust with the Cuban leadership. Francis, the first-ever pope from Latin America, is seen in the region as someone who can talk to the US but who is sympathetic to long-held Latin apprehensions about American dominance in the region. So he is politically well-positioned as an intermediary that the Cubans can trust.

Francis was also able to push Cuban leaders to continue negotiating. The Catholic church has deep roots in majority-Catholic Cuba, even after Fidel Castro's experiment with Communist-style state atheism, and still plays a real role in politics there. As pope, Francis would have real diplomatic capital and connections within Havana.

This is Francis's first major diplomatic accomplishment since he became pope in 2013. Pope John Paul II, who served from 1978 to 2005, also had a long record of brokering diplomatic negotiations, including in Latin America.

I can really understand both sides of the argument, but with Bergoglio its pretty clear what drives his position.

One can arguably make the case that through free trade, you can be able to much better topple off the Castro regime. So it could lead to greater freedom to the persecuted Catholics inside of Cuba.

I don't know I am kind of on the fence on that one, from an economics perspective it just seems to show that the data really points towards the direction of the worst problems of the Marxist economic system will always be toppled when you allow the free trade (to differentiate it between its philosophical application/thought). Even if some argue that Russia is still run by the KGB, at the very least you have the opportunity to have some religious freedom. The Church can better do her mission, if she is allowed to preach freely without restrictions from the state. Any sort of government and economic system that allows that much more efficiently is to preferred over other things. So in potentio, having Cuba be allowed to trade with other Western countries in the long term better serve to the possibility of having a traditional Catholic priest be there to give the sacraments to those who desire it. Even if it takes a long time for this to happen, this step can definitely be a bonus in the right direction.

I forgot to mention, even if it might mean that the state would be better funded due to more liberal economic sanctions allowing free trade to Cuba.

It seems pretty straightforward to me, even if the godless atheistic state gains more power, and becomes more of a danger potentially. At the same time, you have a time window where the truth of the Gospel can be taught in all its purity. The people in Cuba are starving, and St. Thomas teaches that it is near impossible to lead a virtuous life if you don't have the basic necessities of life. If you are constantly starving you will very likely be left to Prostitution, drugs, and other extremely dangerous activities. The black market is even more fierce when you have a totally statist economy, to get even basic necessities of life you need to go through the black market (think of Russia, and everyone using Newspaper as toilet paper including 2 star generals during the Cold war). If you are a widower or a single mother, or just an orphan that is pretty much the only way you will make it to your 18th birthday, you would have to steal just to survive and it is difficult to temper that desire to have more when you need to steal on a consistent basis to simply survive. Just remember that St. Nicholas had given a sum of money to those three poor women so that they would not have to resort to committing sin in order to marry.

That's my 2 cents on that specific post of the whole Cuba/Francis topic.

Manila, Philippines, Jan 18, 2015 / 12:56 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Archbishop Bernardito Auza – a member of the organizing committee for Pope Francis’ upcoming visit to the U.S. – has revealed details of the proposed schedule, which includes visits to three cities.

“He would arrive on the 22nd and he would leave the evening of the 27th. It’s really a full six days, plus the travel, so it’s really one week,” Archbishop Auza told CNA/EWTN News in Manila on Jan. 18.

A Philippines native, Archbishop Auza is the Holy See’s permanent observer to the U.N. in New York and to the Organization of American States in Washington. He is back in his homeland this week participating in the events of Pope Francis’ Jan. 15-19 apostolic journey.

The archbishop spoke of a meeting held last Monday by the U.S. trip’s organizing committee appointed by Pope Francis, during which the details of the visit were discussed.

After a projected arrival to Washington, D.C. on the evening of Sept. 22, they’re proposing that Pope Francis visit the White House the following morning, where the official welcoming ceremony would take place.

Following his stop at the White House, the pontiff would go on to celebrate Mass at Washington’s Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception.

The Mass, the archbishop observed, would be primarily for bishops, consecrated and religious men and women, seminarians and representatives from humanitarian and Catholic charitable organizations.

“And we might say really the highlight of the Washington visit might be his speech to the joint-meeting of Congress, so the Senate and the House of Representatives,” Archbishop Auza said. According to the proposal, Pope Francis would leave for New York City on the afternoon of the 24th.

The U.N. general-assembly would be his destination on the morning of the 25th, which is also the opening of the 3-day Post-2015 Sustainable Development Summit.

“Practically all of the heads of states and governments will be around and they will all be there on that day, so if the Pope were to finalize this visit to the U.S. that means that he would address all the heads of states and of governments, who will be sitting with their official delegations,” the archbishop explained.

“We certainly are looking forward to that,” he said, noting how everyone involved is anticipating what the Pope might say, particularly U.N. secretary-general Ban Ki-moon, who is “extremely thrilled.”

The papal address at the U.N. would take up the entire morning of Sept. 25, Archbishop Auza said. He added that proposals for what the pontiff may do afterward include an interreligious meeting, and “of course the Pope will visit St. Patrick’s (Cathedral). That’s for sure.”

The visit to the historic church wouldn’t likely mean the celebration of Mass there, the archbishop said. Mass has been proposed instead for another area of New York. He named the Madison Square Garden as a possibility.

“Our plan is not to have a huge Mass outside of Philadelphia, because the focus will really be Philadelphia, because the Pope is going to the United States for the World Meeting of Families,” he explained.

Perhaps the most “unique ingredient” of Pope Francis’ proposed schedule for New York would be an interethnic meeting with the pontiff, which is significant given the diverse ethnic background of the city.

“Ground Zero,” the site of the terrorist attack on Sept. 11, 2001, which brought down New York City’s twin World Trade Center towers, is another foreseeable stop on the Pope’s itinerary, Archbishop Auza noted.

Benedict XVI visited the site during his 2008 visit, but the Archbishop mentioned that since then the official memorial has been inaugurated, the museum has been finished, and the metal cross found in the wreckage of the towers is there.

“But these are just proposals. At the end of February there will be the first organizational visit (from a Vatican delegation), and then we will see what we could really fill in,” the archbishop said.

Pope Francis could spend a couple of nights in New York, but “it depends” on what else comes up.

From New York the Roman Pontiff would head to Philadelphia in the early morning of the 26th as his last stop, where he is set to participate in the World Meeting of Families from Sept. 26-27.

“Philadelphia is confirmed. That’s for sure,” the archbishop observed, explaining that the two big events set to take place with the Pope are a prayer vigil on the 26th and Mass Sunday, the 27th.

There is also an encounter planned with grandparents and children, however the archbishop said he does not know whether or not the Pope will participate.

Pope Francis himself confirmed his presence at the World Meeting of Families in Philadelphia during the Nov. 17-19 Humanum Conference in Rome, saying that he will attend “if God wills it.”

Besides the encounter with families, Archbishop Auza said that the Philadelphia visit will likely include “a visit either to a children’s hospital or a juvenile prison.”

Members of the organizational committee for the visit, he said, include himself; papal nuncio to the United States Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano; Cardinal Donald Wuerl, archbishop of Washington; Cardinal Sean Patrick O’Malley, archbishop of Boston; Archbishop Joseph Kurtz of Louisville, also president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops; Cardinal Timothy Dolan, archbishop of New York; Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia; Msgr. Ronny Jenkins, secretary-general at the bishops’ conference, as well as a team of various secretaries and assistants.

On his Jan. 15 flight from Sri Lanka to the Philippines, Pope Francis also made the surprise announcement that he would canonize the founder of California’s first missions, Blessed Junipero Serra.

When asked whether or not the Pope’s itinerary for his U.S. trip would include a visit to California for the canonization, Archbishop Auza said that although it would be the ideal place, the state will most likely not be on the agenda.

“I think he may do that in Washington,” he said, noting how there is a statue of Bl. Serra in the National Statuary Hall of the Capitol building, honoring him as one of the founders of California.

The pontiff would most likely preside over “what they call a brief canonization, not the formal solemn canonization,” he said.

On a final note, Archbishop Auza spoke of the possibility that the Pope would go to Mexico as part of his trip to the U.S., saying that “they might skip Mexico this time because it becomes a very, very long (trip).”

The pontiff might make another visit to Latin America, the archbishop noted, although he did not know when that would be.

“So that’s more or less the plan. It’s a plan, we’ll see how it will pan out.”

In addition to being Catholic News Agency's Rome bureau chief, Alan Holdren is also the Rome correspondent for EWTN News Nightly.

This is why we're headed for a crunch. It simply isn't possible for either party to step out of the battle. Burke and Co. very obviously decided when they formulated their questions that they were headed for this outcome if Bergoglio didn't retract.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum